Jump to content

[1.02] KW Rocketry v2.7 Available - 1.02 Compatibility! - 16/05/2015


Recommended Posts

I noticed that the RCS Quad in this pack does not properly apply lateral thrust when translating - at least, according to RCS Build Aid. It appears that the thrust vector for sideways thrust is actually directed 5-10 degrees to aft. Replacing with normal stock RCS quads shows the correct thrust direction. I'd prefer the improved Isp of the KW ones, but not if it affects actual translation.

I'll have a look into that after I get back from work today. I think that's just because the nozzles on the RCS are pivoted slightly.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Hi all, first post, sorry it's about a problem,

I seem to be getting only parts of the Mod? Like, as in I get some parts but it doesn't seem like very many, not many new rockets, fuel tanks and a new fangled RCS, but I cant seem to find fairing stuff at all. I've watched the video, so I know it's supposed to be in structures, but the only parts I have are some new struts and the big adapters. There is no faring base, nose cone, or sidewalls that I can find, and I also find no new engines of any kind. I also cant find the "ships" folder the installation directions refer to at all. I'd be inclined to believe maybe I just got a bad download, but I've deleted and re-downloaded 3 times now in addition to restarting the game maybe half a dozen times. I'm new to the game, and the only other mod I've installed is RendezMe, so it's certainly possible I'm doing something wrong, but I can't tell what. Can anyone possibly give me some sort of direction or help? Am I not putting folders in the right place? Not extracting correctly? Sorry if I'm being obtuse.

Cheers!

Fairings are under Aerodynamics, not Structural. You don't have a 'bad download'. Destination Ships is in the main KSP install directory. Just copy the Ships folder in the top level of the rar into the KSP install folder.

First thing first: your emblem graphic? Very slick!

Second, very excited about trying this new pack (with a smaller memory footprint). Excellent work!

EDIT: Bummer, I'm getting crashes on load now--I can use the old pack, but not the new pack. Not sure what might be causing it (not a memory error, since this one is smaller). I don't think KSP was patched recently, and deleting the whole directory and installing it didn't work. Using the non-auto shroud option doesn't work either.

I too am getting crashes. No errors though, just instant exit to desktop.

It happens when I try to load a ship, or return to VAB from a flight.

Did you check both Ksp.log and output_log.txt? (latter in ksp_data)

Edited by Starwaster
Link to post
Share on other sites

Yup, going to go ahead and report some kind of bug that everyone else seems to be having.

When exiting from a flight (reverting) back to the VAB, I get an instant CTD with no error messages. Ship was almost exclusively KW parts, never had any problems in the past.

I was in orbit, if that matters at all.

And right before I tried to revert back to the VAB, all the tanks appeared translucent or something, like I could see through them. That's probably not actually the case and it was pry due to some kind of framerate flickering, but regardless, that's how it looked. So I'm just reporting that bug.

Also, a few of the parts list view models are flipped around from where they used to be. (Like a different side of the part is showing) Not sure what that is or if it's even intentional, but just making note of that.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok,

This time, it crashed (CTD no errors shown), when launching a ship with KW parts.

The last few lines in the output_log.txt are....

all systems started

(Filename: C:/BuildAgent/work/7535de4ca26c26ac/Runtime/ExportGenerated/StandalonePlayer/UnityEngineDebug.cpp Line: 54)

Crash!!!

ERROR: Error while initializing dbghelp.dll, GetLastError: 'The operation completed successfully.' (Address: 00000000)

========== OUTPUTING STACK TRACE ==================

ERROR: Error while initializing dbghelp.dll, GetLastError: 'The operation completed successfully.' (Address: 00000000)

========== END OF STACKTRACE ===========

**** Crash! ****

Also here are the last few moments of the KSP.log file...

[LOG 21:08:28.262] ------------------- initializing flight mode... ------------------

[LOG 21:08:28.264] Loading ship from file: E:/Steam/steamapps/common/Kerbal Space Program/KSP_Data/../saves/Space Program/Ships/VAB/Auto-Saved Ship.craft

[ERR 21:08:28.340] Cannot find fx group of that name for decoupler

[ERR 21:08:28.530] Cannot find fx group of that name for decoupler

[ERR 21:08:28.533] Cannot find fx group of that name for decoupler

[ERR 21:08:28.537] Cannot find fx group of that name for decoupler

[ERR 21:08:28.540] Cannot find fx group of that name for decoupler

[ERR 21:08:28.543] Cannot find fx group of that name for decoupler

[ERR 21:08:28.546] Cannot find fx group of that name for decoupler

[ERR 21:08:28.549] Cannot find fx group of that name for decoupler

[ERR 21:08:28.553] Cannot find fx group of that name for decoupler

[ERR 21:08:28.556] Cannot find fx group of that name for decoupler

[ERR 21:08:28.559] Cannot find fx group of that name for decoupler

[ERR 21:08:28.562] Cannot find fx group of that name for decoupler

[ERR 21:08:28.565] Cannot find fx group of that name for decoupler

[ERR 21:08:28.569] Cannot find fx group of that name for decoupler

[ERR 21:08:28.572] Cannot find fx group of that name for decoupler

[ERR 21:08:28.575] Cannot find fx group of that name for decoupler

[ERR 21:08:28.578] Cannot find fx group of that name for decoupler

[ERR 21:08:28.582] Cannot find fx group of that name for decoupler

[ERR 21:08:28.585] Cannot find fx group of that name for decoupler

[ERR 21:08:28.588] Cannot find fx group of that name for decoupler

[ERR 21:08:28.591] Cannot find fx group of that name for decoupler

[LOG 21:08:28.708] Munar One loaded!

[LOG 21:08:28.719] putting ship to ground: 0

[LOG 21:08:28.725] [Munar One]: Ready to Launch - waiting to start physics...

[LOG 21:08:28.751] Crewmember Jebediah Kerman assigned to Mk1-2 Command Pod, seat # 0 (crew seat index: 0)

[LOG 21:08:28.751] Crewmember Bill Kerman assigned to Mk1-2 Command Pod, seat # 1 (crew seat index: 1)

[LOG 21:08:28.752] Crewmember Bob Kerman assigned to Mk1-2 Command Pod, seat # 2 (crew seat index: 2)

[LOG 21:08:28.753] [FLIGHT GLOBALS]: Switching To Vessel Munar One ----------------------

[LOG 21:08:28.755] setting new dominant body: Kerbin

FlightGlobals.mainBody: Kerbin

[LOG 21:08:28.756] Reference Frame: Rotating

Link to post
Share on other sites
Fairings are under Aerodynamics, not Structural. You don't have a 'bad download'. Destination Ships is in the main KSP install directory. Just copy the Ships folder in the top level of the rar into the KSP install folder.

No, its not. It's not anywhere, and none of the multiple copies I've downloaded had a "ships" folder to copy, like I stated originally.

Edited by Pesqueeb
Link to post
Share on other sites

So, is this the third time that people have proclaimed "KW is dead for good!" only to have it come back? You guys are just amazing.

By the way, for the fairings (not the engine ones, the payload ones), could you try to make them with the procedural fairings plugin by e-dog? I really like the style of the KW fairings - and it would cut down on memory usage.

EDIT: Why is the mega-3.75m 4-nozzle engine not in the chart? Has it been... removed?

Oh, and I forgot the mandatory OH MY GOD KICKASSKYLE AND WINNERWINSTON ARE BACK!!!!! HELLLLLLLLL YEAAAAAAHHHH!

Edited by wasmic
Link to post
Share on other sites

I really like this part pack, particularly all of the various 3.5m components, fuel tanks, structural bits, it's all great stuff to have.

The one area that I think this mod needs some work is in the engines, particularly the 3.5m engines. I can understand your desire not to create engines that are overpowered but as it is, they are incredibly weak when compared to the 2.5m stock parts and that means your payload fraction collapses when using your 3.75m parts. One of the main reasons that I like this pack is because it allows the boosting of larger creations into orbit but that advantage is massively dimished if I have to use a rocket with a stupid number of stages because the payload fraction is terrible.

Instead of describing the problem qualitatively though, let me put some numbers to the issue.

A stock LV-T45 has 200KN of thrust and a mass of 1.5 - TWR = 13.6, Vacuum Isp = 370s

A stock Mainsail has 1500KN of thrust and mass of 6 - TWR = 25.5, Vacuum Isp = 330s.

TWR has gone up and Isp has gone down, that's all good. Using 4 LV-T45s is a very very different experience to using 1 Mainsail as everyone who has played KSP will know.

Now look at the Mainsail and the Griffon XX:

A stock Mainsail has 1500KN of thrust and mass of 6 - TWR = 25.5, Vacuum Isp = 330s.

A Griffon XX has 3800KN of thrust and mass of 20 - TWR = 19.36, Vacuum Isp = 310s.

This time, despite having a bigger part, both TWR and Isp have gone down. This is a problem because now, you aren't offering any unique capability for using your parts, you're better off in every way to use two Mainsails and that's a real shame.

If we look at the Titan too:

A Titan has 2700KN of thrust and mass of 14 - TWR = 19.65, Vacuum Isp = 315s.

This still has both a worse TWR and Isp than the Mainsail.

If both of these engines were better than the Mainsail in terms of efficiency (Isp) that wouldn't be a problem but they aren't, you are simply objectively better off by having two mainsails instead of one of these 3.57m KW Rocketry engines. KSP is already hampered by excessive part count so it isn't good that people are being encouraged to add unneccessary parts to their ships to get a better performing rocket.

Might I suggest that a a good method of balancing would be in terms of Thrust Power/weight ratio. The Mainsail actually has a much better Thrust Power/Weight ratio than the LV-45 but let's say that you don't want to risk making an overpowered part, so you kept the same ratio for the 3.75m parts. Mainsail thrust power/weight ratio = 404,662.5

That would mean for the Griffon XX thrust power = 8,093,250 (=404,662.5*20) and Titan 1 thrust power = 5,665,275 (=404,662.5*14).

If you wanted to keep the existing Isp values, that would give the Griffon XX Thrust = 2*8093250/310/9.81 = 5322KN @ 310s Isp and Titan 1 Thrust = 2*5665275/315/9.81 = 3667KN @ 315s Isp. This would then offer a capability unique in terms of additional lifting capacity compared to using 2 Mailsails with Mass = 12 and Thrust 3000KN @ 330s Isp.

It's strange because your smaller engines seem to be more much reasonably balanced, it's like you've looked at the 3.75m parts and just massively underestimated what it is reasonable for them to have.

Please don't take this critically, as I said, I really like the mod, I'd just like to see certain parts of it become as useful as they should be.

Link to post
Share on other sites

For everyone getting CTDs, does deleting Fairings and FairingBases fix the issue?

4E7E1.png

I really like this part pack, particularly all of the various 3.5m components, fuel tanks, structural bits, it's all great stuff to have.

The one area that I think this mod needs some work is in the engines, particularly the 3.5m engines.

Please don't take this critically, as I said, I really like the mod, I'd just like to see certain parts of it become as useful as they should be.

This is an issue that arises very often.

KW aims for stock balance compatibility. If not, many people would complain of them being OP. It uses the same thrust/efficiency stock parts do, which falls a lot the bigger your engine is. That's one of the main reasons a 5m engine isn't in KW - you either get a really big engine that's just not worth using or it's technically imba - which means people will complain a lot.

Link to post
Share on other sites
This is an issue that arises very often.

KW aims for stock balance compatibility. If not, many people would complain of them being OP. It uses the same thrust/efficiency stock parts do, which falls a lot the bigger your engine is. That's one of the main reasons a 5m engine isn't in KW - you either get a really big engine that's just not worth using or it's technically imba - which means people will complain a lot.

It doesn't though, I've just demonstrated mathematically that the 3.75 parts don't follow stock balancing at all. It's right there in my post where I compare the stock performance of engines of different sizes.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Fractal is right - the 3.75m engines need a rebalance. Especially the Griffon XX, as it overheats too much to be usable at full thrust.

EDIT:

No, its not. It's not anywhere, and none of the multiple copies I've downloaded had a "ships" folder to copy, like I stated originally.

If you don't have the ships, you have a bad download. Have you used the mediafire link? If yes, there's nothing more we can do for you. If no, go ahead and try.

Link to post
Share on other sites
It doesn't though, I've just demonstrated mathematically that the 3.75 parts don't follow stock balancing at all. It's right there in my post where I compare the stock performance of engines of different sizes.

The trouble is that balance is really really difficult. If you add a part, say a "balanced" radial engine mount (thar be hundreds) and add it to a stock game, you have now op'd your game because you can do something new eh? So you counteract that by making your part a "bit" heavier than it should technically be and hey presto, you have not removed the effect of being able to mount 5 atomics in an area that could technically only have one (minioxagonalthingies aside peeps, read with me) but you have added a handicap to make up for it.

In KW IMHO they have done a really good job of exactly that balancing act. Yes I completely agree that two mainsails are technically more effective than one Griffon or whatever BUT you can't actually get two useable Mainsails there without either scrapping some of the peripheral stuff like SRBs or alternatively doing some very fancy design work - I really hope that you made one because they're better and use it because that proves my point, the Mainsail is not made obsolete and maintains it's place but you have choices if you are willing to compromise a little for a larger engine and simpler overall build.

[EDIT] It prolly does get too hot tho

Link to post
Share on other sites

If you don't have the ships, you have a bad download. Have you used the mediafire link? If yes, there's nothing more we can do for you. If no, go ahead and try.

No, I have not, only the link from SpacePort. The Mediafire link was suggested by r/kerbalspaceprogram as well, but I'm currently at work so I've not had an opportunity today to try it. I'll report back if that one is any different.

Link to post
Share on other sites
No, its not. It's not anywhere, and none of the multiple copies I've downloaded had a "ships" folder to copy, like I stated originally.

sorry its not in the top level of the archive as I said. But it is there.

open the rar. double click on Release Package v2.5

There's three folfers

GameData

NoAutoShrouds

Ships

Link to post
Share on other sites
The trouble is that balance is really really difficult. If you add a part, say a "balanced" radial engine mount (thar be hundreds) and add it to a stock game, you have now op'd your game because you can do something new eh? So you counteract that by making your part a "bit" heavier than it should technically be and hey presto, you have not removed the effect of being able to mount 5 atomics in an area that could technically only have one (minioxagonalthingies aside peeps, read with me) but you have added a handicap to make up for it.

In KW IMHO they have done a really good job of exactly that balancing act. Yes I completely agree that two mainsails are technically more effective than one Griffon or whatever BUT you can't actually get two useable Mainsails there without either scrapping some of the peripheral stuff like SRBs or alternatively doing some very fancy design work - I really hope that you made one because they're better and use it because that proves my point, the Mainsail is not made obsolete and maintains it's place but you have choices if you are willing to compromise a little for a larger engine and simpler overall build

I've seen people go to the effort of adding groups of 6 LV-T30s and an LV-T45 to get the better efficiency that that offers over using a Mainsail, that is despite Mainsails actually offering a substantial TWR advantage over those parts. Now, that's cool, that's just making the best use of parts for a specific purpose. If you don't need the superior TWR that the Mainsail offers then by all means design something that's a bit more economical. The cluster of engines isn't better than the mainsail, it's just different, it won't lift as heavy a payload but if it can provide enough thrust, it will keep on burning for longer.

The 3.75m engines in KW rocketry aren't analoguous to that situation though, sticking two engines on the bottom of the 3.75m stack isn't especially hard but it doesn't really matter whether it is or not. In a game that is so CPU performance limited, there isn't much to be gained by making a player do a job with 3 parts that could be done with one and look a whole lot nicer in the process.

A better Griffon XX or Titan wouldn't make the Mainsail any more obselete than a Mainsail makes the 1.25m engines obselete, they do different jobs for different sized rockets. On the other hand, a Mainsail does make a Griffon XX/Titan obselete because it's better in every possible way.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm still with Fractal here - but if Kyle or Winston states that they won't change it, fine by me. I'll just change it myself. One of the best things about KSP add-ons is that they're heavily customizable, even by the end user. That way, everybody can get it the way they want :)

Link to post
Share on other sites
I was already planning the rebalancing of the higher/moderate engines.

I'm hitting the Redux textures tonight so that should be done sometime tonight hopefully.

Are you gonna look into the problems we've been having?

I mean, i'm not sure what it is really, but.. i can't live without the KW pack.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think I've seen a true KW Rocketry update since I started playing KSP at around version 18.4 or so. I had thought that the mod was simply dead. I'm glad to see that I was wrong as this is still the highest quality and best balanced rocket parts mod I've found.

Anyway, I do have a question. I can't check at the moment, as I'm at work, but have you changed the effects on the 2.5 meter SPS engine? It was using the RCS effect, which is 2D. This isn't a problem for small RCS blocks, as it's too small to really notice the 2D effect. Unfortunately, it's pretty obvious on a large 2.5 meter engine. A volumetric effect, like the other engines use, would probably look better.

Finally, thanks for your efforts on maintaining this great mod, Kyle and Winston.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...